1/25/08

In December 2005, the New York Times reported that hundreds, perhaps thousands, of Americans have had their phones wiretapped by the National Security Agency (NSA) without any judicial review. But the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), passed by Congress in 1978, prohibits domestic spying unless a warrant is first issued by the FISA Court. By authorizing government spies to bypass the process mandated by FISA, President Bush authorized them to break the law.

The so-called “Protect America Act,” which passed in August, made the situation worse by sanctioning a legal infrastructure under which American citizens might unwittingly be subject to daily, repeated invasions of privacy or violations of other constitutional rights. These liberties are not abstract or optional. Freedom from government spying on our private lives is at the core of what it means to be an American – the kind of personal liberty that hundreds of thousands of Americans have died to protect.

All parties involved must be held accountable for any illegal activity, including telecommunications companies (telecoms) that satisfied government requests for information about private communications. FISA currently provides sufficient mechanisms to allow telecoms to proceed lawfully with such requests. Every American should have the confidence that our judicial system will ensure that telecoms will not be permitted to circumvent this established process and undermine our fundamental right to privacy.

It is unacceptable that the FISA reform being debated now seeks blanket immunity for the telecoms’ alleged complicity in the Administration’s actions. If the telecoms never have to testify, Americans may never know the true extent to which they have been targeted for surveillance. We have a right to know what’s been done and how far the overreaching went.

In protecting the telecoms, the Administration is protecting itself. At a minimum, the Administration should not be given the power to bury the secrets of its domestic spying program by keeping the telecoms out of court. Telecom immunity not only has the potential to excuse illegal activity, it also precludes the public from getting access to information and prevents Congress from conducting effective oversight.

Immunity compromises will not serve the interests of the American people. Substituting the government as the defendant in telecom lawsuits will only further rob Americans of their day in court by forcing them to sue a government that may use the power of the executive, state secrets, and other “privileges” to withhold information. Reimbursing the telecoms for their legal costs through indemnification rests financial burden on the taxpayers – essentially Americans paying for spying to which they object.

Congress should err on the side of our Constitution and not bow to political pressure by signing off on telecom immunity. Americans deserve nothing less.

There is no reason to immunize the telecom corporations because they are already immunized if they had a good faith reason to believe they were following the law. The only reason to immunize them is to prevent the truth about the extent of the lawbreaking from coming to light.

The Bush team argue impending financial doom for the telecom industry should lawsuits be permitted to continue. However, at this time, the financial impact is speculative (pdf file) with a market that “seems unconcerned” about the lawsuits filed against telecoms:

For example, when the complaint in Hepting v. AT&T Corp. was filed and when AT&T’s motion to dismiss the suit was denied, AT&T’s stock price remained essentially unaffected. The entirety of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s regulatory system requiring public filings and disclosures is premised on the idea that, when the relevant information is available publicly, the market is the most effective indicator of the value of a corporation. That the stock price of AT&T was unaffected by the suit indicates the market’s determination that the company’s financial footing remains sound, despite the potential liability.

Moreover, telecommunications carriers have survived enormous payouts in class action suits in the past. For example, in September of this year, Sprint received preliminary approval from the court for a $30 million class-action settlement. And in 1994, AT&T agreed to pay a $100 million settlement. Just as they have for the other risks incumbent in their business, telecommunications carriers have liability insurance to protect them in the event of an adverse civil judgment. And if, at some point in the future, a series of judgments comes to present a threat of widespread bankruptcy in the telecommunications industry, the government may take action at that time. But any preemptive liability shield is premature and unneeded.

Thus, should the telecom lawsuits proceed and if damages are awarded by the courts and if the damages are not covered by telecom liability insurance, and if Congress then determines that a bailout is needed for the industry, then Congress has the authority to legislate funding to the industry, thus preserving the plaintiffs’ right to a judicial remedy and the public’s right to a transparent government. As Sen. Feingold notes:

If the companies engaged in such widespread illegal conduct that the damages would be enormous, Congress can intervene to limit the damages. That’s a far more appropriate response than simply giving the companies a free pass for any illegal conduct.

Moreover, if the concern is financial liability, why is the immunity so broad that “cases will be dismissed even if they do not seek money damages but only declaratory and injunctive relief.”

The lawsuit distraction is just that... A distraction from the real issue of the bush illegally spying on Americans.

A former telecom executive told us that efforts to obtain call details go back to early 2001, predating the 9/11 attacks and the president's now celebrated secret executive order. The source, who asked not to be identified so as not to out his former company, reports that the NSA approached U.S. carriers and asked for their cooperation in a "data-mining" operation, which might eventually cull "millions" of individual calls and e-mails.

Like the pressure applied to ITT a half-century ago, our source says the government was insistent, arguing that his competitors had already shown their patriotism by signing on. The NSA would not comment on the issue, saying that, "We do not discuss details of actual or alleged operational issues."

Although the president told the nation that his NSA eavesdropping program was limited to known Al Qaeda agents or supporters abroad making calls into the U.S., comments of other administration officials and intelligence veterans indicate that the NSA cast its net far more widely. AT&T technician Mark Klein inadvertently discovered that the whole flow of Internet traffic in several AT&T operations centers was being regularly diverted to the NSA, a charge indirectly substantiated by John Yoo, the Justice Department lawyer who wrote the official legal memos legitimizing the president's warrantless wiretapping program. Yoo told FRONTLINE: "The government needs to have access to international communications so that it can try to find communications that are coming into the country where Al Qaeda's trying to send messages to cell members in the country. In order to do that, it does have to have access to communication networks."

Conventional wisdom has long been that the bulk of the surveillance operations -- groundbreaking because they lacked judicial oversight -- involved primarily telephone calls. However, officials say the Bush administration's program frequently went after e-mail and other Internet traffic.

These actions by the bush administration go far beyond being simply criminal. They are an attack on the The Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

What part of these oaths do the politicians that swear to them fail to understand here?

Presidential Oath:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

For Congress Members:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter."

Many of these politicians' actions are not simply impeachable offenses for a failure to uphold their oaths of office, but exhibit a heretical acceptance of criminal actions and contempt for the founding documents that could only be described as treason.

Well played, ACLU. Majority Leader Reid might not have felt a sufficient amount of heat as Americans with computers (the netroots) attempt to intervene on FISA, but I can promise you that articles like this in hometown papers get staffs and Senators to pay attention.

Sen. Harry Reid angered liberals in his party last month as he sought to shield telecom companies from liability for their role in the Bush administration's domestic spying program.

As the Senate debates the surveillance issue this week, the criticism of Reid shows that his role is putting him at odds with his party's base.

Kudos to the ACLU for their efforts to attack this odious legislation on another PR front! As another point of attack, "Stop the Spying!" wants you to get out your webcam and participate in a PFAW video effort to get your message out:

Shoot a Video Today!

Fire up your video cameras and webcams.

In 60 seconds or less, give your city and state and tell your members of Congress why you want them to oppose telecom immunity.

Read the Terms of Video Submission, and send your video clips to fisa@pfaw.org, or use the file-sending site YouSendIt to upload your video to the web -- no registration required. YouSendIt will then send your video to us.

PFAW and partner organizations will send your videos to key decision-makers in Congress, especially those who may be able to use activist video testimonials in hearings or other procedures.

You make the video, and PFAW will do whatever they can to distribute to the powers that be and to the wankers that are fighting against your freedom!

With Congress back in session this week and the Presidential season in full swing, the fight to prevent the Bush administration from granting immuniy to the telecoms for illegal spying is heating up once again. Activists and bloggers alike are keeping the heat on.

First, Credo Mobile (formerly Working Assets) urged its members to write to Senators Clinton, Obama and McCain, the three presidential candidates who are still in the Senate and who have said they'd oppose immunity.

Dick Cheney doesn't rear his ugly head often, but when he does it's always on a topic of critical importance to the Bush agenda. Today, Dick came out "firing" on FISA:

Vice President Dick Cheney prodded Congress on Wednesday to extend and broaden an expiring surveillance law, saying "fighting the war on terror is a long-term enterprise" that should not come with an expiration date.

"This cause is bigger than the quarrels of party and the agendas of politicians," Cheney said. "And if we in Washington, all of us, can only see our way clear to work together, then the outcome should not be in doubt."

Administration allies in Congress not only want the expiring law made permanent but amended to give telephone companies and other communications providers immunity from being sued for helping the government eavesdropping and other intelligence-gathering efforts.

Cheney said such providers "face dozens of lawsuits."

"The intelligence community doesn't have the facilities to carry out the kind of international surveillance needed to defend this country since 9-11. In some situations, there is no alternative to seeking assistance from the private sector. This is entirely appropriate," Cheney said.

Cheney's comments can be summed up as: Don't sue companies that help us expand Big Brother, which will be around forever because the War on Terra is never ending.

The Bush team argue impending financial doom for the telecom industry should lawsuits be permitted to continue. However, at this time, the financial impact is speculative (pdf file) with a market that “seems unconcerned” about the lawsuits filed against telecoms:

For example, when the complaint in Hepting v. AT&T Corp. was filed and when AT&T’s motion to dismiss the suit was denied, AT&T’s stock price remained essentially unaffected. The entirety of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s regulatory system requiring public filings and disclosures is premised on the idea that, when the relevant information is available publicly, the market is the most effective indicator of the value of a corporation. That the stock price of AT&T was unaffected by the suit indicates the market’s determination that the company’s financial footing remains sound, despite the potential liability.

Moreover, telecommunications carriers have survived enormous payouts in class action suits in the past. For example, in September of this year, Sprint received preliminary approval from the court for a $30 million class-action settlement. And in 1994, AT&T agreed to pay a $100 million settlement. Just as they have for the other risks incumbent in their business, telecommunications carriers have liability insurance to protect them in the event of an adverse civil judgment. And if, at some point in the future, a series of judgments comes to present a threat of widespread bankruptcy in the telecommunications industry, the government may take action at that time. But any preemptive liability shield is premature and unneeded.

Thus, should the telecom lawsuits proceed and if damages are awarded by the courts and if the damages are not covered by telecom liability insurance, and if Congress then determines that a bailout is needed for the industry, then Congress has the authority to legislate funding to the industry, thus preserving the plaintiffs’ right to a judicial remedy and the public’s right to a transparent government. As Sen. Feingold notes:

If the companies engaged in such widespread illegal conduct that the damages would be enormous, Congress can intervene to limit the damages. That’s a far more appropriate response than simply giving the companies a free pass for any illegal conduct.

Moreover, if the concern is financial liability, why is the immunity so broad that “cases will be dismissed even if they do not seek money damages but only declaratory and injunctive relief.”

"If Senator Reid wanted to win, he would have put the judiciary vote on the floor first,” Caroline Frederickson, director of the Washington legislative office of the American Civil Liberties Union, said. “It seems as if he wants to lose.”

A recent poll found that 57 percent of Americans oppose amnesty for telecoms. If you agree, there's still time to sign our FISA petition, which we'll deliver to Senator Harry Reid tomorrow.

“I am a Republican, and at times I’m embarrassed by the lack of cooperation that this president and his appointees have had with the legislative branch,” said Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) in a hearing yesterday. “There is a seething resentment by members of Congress who are Republicans by the fact that this administration has not even cooperated with us.”

Does any one really feel sorry for you and the other Republicans because YOU put that idiot in the White House? Nope!You reap what you have sewn. And you, Dana Rohrabacher, should take personal responsibility for what you and your fellow Republicans have done to this nation. Don't try and play the "bush victimized us!" card... We aren't buying it.

On the air, he says that Latinos "breed like rabbits", and that America's public schools are "teaching kids in the third grade how to put a condom on a cucumber." He explains that civil rights are a "racket" that is "used to steal only from the white male -- no one else pays the price." He is worried about "degenerates on the left who want to sell Americans on the idea that homosexuality, bisexuality, transsexuality, even sex with animals is normal." He demonizes pot smokers, refers to third-world nations as "turd world nations", and strongly opposes abortion (although his first wife had two while they were married). After the Dixie Chicks spoke ill of President George W. Bush, Savage inexplicably suggested they should be jailed as traitors. "We've all been warned about the dangers of a theocracy", says Savage, "where religious zealots rule. Today in America, we have a she-ocracy where a minority of feminist zealots rule the culture."

One of his books was a work of fiction called Vital Signs, in which the protagonist wrestles with his attraction to masculine beauty. "I choose to override my desires for men when they swell in me", Weiner wrote, "waiting out the passions like a storm, below decks." At one time, Weiner self-published his own zines featuring inflammatory pieces about gay sex at San Francisco bathhouses. He was apparently opposed to such things. But he was a friend of beat poet Allen Ginsberg, the very, very out gay author of Howl. In a 1970 letter to Ginsberg, someone signed Michael Weiner described a semi-erotic encounter he had had with another man in Fiji. Weiner says he did not write the letter, though the return address was in Honolulu, where Weiner resided at the time. Savage now describes his one-time friend Ginsberg as "latrine slime," and says that upon hearing of his death, "I clasped my hands together and prayed to God. I said, 'Thank you, God, for answering my prayers. One of the blights of the human race is gone.'"

Perhaps, his statements after Ginsberg's death might be the result of unrequited love? Though, I am not certain how this would explain his attacks on women, like the Dixie Chicks, that stake out strong political positions?

Beyond his flip-flopping sexuality issues are his well documented deficiencies concerning issues ofideology, race - which extends well beyond just the above mentioned Latinos - and religion:

Savage on the tsunami: "I wouldn't call it a tragedy. ... We shouldn't be spending a nickel on this" — Listen

Brave New Films has been conducting a a campaign to get advertisers to drop support of Micheal "Savage" Weiner's outrageous statements on his radio show "Savage nation." So far, four advertisers have buckled under the people's pressure:

* USO is a non-profit organization that does not pay for its PSA's to air. Although it claims to have no control over when its advertisements air, it has refused to even request that its ads not run during the Michael Savage show.

He also seems to have a reckless tendency of advocating violence against those that he targets for his hate speech, as evidenced in his quotes above and something that his advertisers might want to be made aware of as well.

I suggest that you contact all of these companies and either 1) ask them to stop supporting the hate speech spewed by this bigot by pulling their adds OR 2) thank them for pulling their advertisements from his show already.

And please remember to be polite since you will catch a lot more flies with honey.

But if they refuse to comply or are particularly obstinate in their statements I won't blame you for verbally unloading on them a little. lol[update] Another advertiser, GEICO, has has agreed to pull their adds.

* USO is a non-profit organization that does not pay for its PSA's to air. Although it claims to have no control over when its advertisements air, it has refused to even request that its ads not run during the Michael Savage show.

* We are getting reports that some corporations are denying their ads are running. This is not true. Here is just one recent commercial segment with Wyeth (Chapstick) and Stamps.com advertising.

The handwriting has been on the wall for some time, but it now seems certain that Senate Democrats will pass a new FISA bill that contains retroactive immunity for telecoms, shielding them from lawsuits over their cooperation with the Bush Administration in its far-reaching warrantless wiretapping program.

Harry Reid -- who has (a) done more than any other individual to ensure that Bush's demands for telecom immunity and warrantless eavesdropping powers will be met in full and (b) allowed the Republicans all year to block virtually every bill without having to bother to actually filibuster -- went to the Senate floor yesterday and, with the scripted assistance of Mitch McConnell and Pat Leahy, warned Chris Dodd, Russ Feingold and others that they would be selfishly wreaking havoc on the schedules of their fellow Senators (making them work over the weekend, ruining their planned "retreat," and even preventing them from going to Davos!) if they bothered everyone with their annoying, pointless little filibuster.

To do so, Reid announced that, unlike for the multiple filibusters from Republican colleagues, he would actually force Dodd and company to engage in a real filibuster. This is what Reid said:

[I]f people think they are going to talk this to death, we are going to be in here all night. This is not something we are going to have a silent filibuster on. If someone wants to filibuster this bill, they are going to do it in the openness of the Senate.

That is what Democrats have been urging Reid to do to the filibustering Republicans all year -- in order to dramatize their obstructionism -- but he has refused to make them actually filibuster anything, generously agreeing instead that every bill requires 60 votes. Instead, he reserves such punishment only for the members of his own caucus trying to take a stand for the rule of law and the Constitution, those who are trying finally to bring some accountability to this administration.

As I noted in my post yesterday, Reid had the audacity to send his spokesman, Jim Manley, to falsely claim to the New York Times that "Senator Reid intends to do everything he can to strip immunity from the bill" -- even though the exact opposite is true. Reid is engaged in at least as much maneuvering to ensure that Bush and Cheney get what they want here as McConnell would be willing to do if he were the Majority Leader.

This is beyond ridiculous, and Harry Reid needs to give up the Senate gavel or be stripped of this position by the rest of the party. This is not simply about retroactive immunity for telcoms that acted illegally... This is about a criminal offense and treasonous act that bush confessed to in front of millions of television viewers.

This assault on The Constitution and the Bill of Rights by politicians across the political spectrum must be stopped if democracy and freedom are to survive in the USA.

Speaking to reporters today, Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) said that he would again filibuster any bill that a provision in it granting retroactive immunity to the telecoms -- or as he put it, "use every tool at my disposal as a Senator" to stop it. So if you were wondering whether anything has changed since Dodd dropped out of the presidential race, nothing has.

Meanwhile, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) sent a letter to President Bush today to ask that he support an extension to the existing surveillance bill -- which seems very unlikely to happen. That letter's below.

Go Dodd! Feingold too! And any of the other Senators that understand what this country is really about...

As angry as I am at this news (and trust me, it’s a good thing John doesn’t like swearing in posts, because I’ve got some words for Harry that would make a sailor blush), and as much as I encourage you to contact Harry Reid, I would also ask that you take a deep breath before doing so

I have one word for Harry Reid:

PRIMARY

If the people don't chase you out of Washington, DC with pitchforks in hand before then?

A study by two nonprofit journalism organizations found that President Bush and top administration officials issued hundreds of false statements about the national security threat from Iraq in the two years following the 2001 terrorist attacks.

The study concluded that the statements "were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses."

A war by the bush administration on the American people:

The study counted 935 false statements in the two-year period. It found that in speeches, briefings, interviews and other venues, Bush and administration officials stated unequivocally on at least 532 occasions that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction or was trying to produce or obtain them or had links to al-Qaida or both.

snip

Bush led with 259 false statements, 231 about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 28 about Iraq's links to al-Qaida, the study found. That was second only to Powell's 244 false statements about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 10 about Iraq and al-Qaida.

They've killed hundreds of thousands of people in an illegal invasion and occupation and it was all a pack of lies...

"One can say with some assurance that in the next year the use of force by the United States is highly unlikely," Bolton told AFP on the sidelines of the Herzliya conference on the balance of Israel's national security.

"That increases the pressure on Israel in that period of time... if it feels Iran is on the verge of acquiring that capability, it brings the decision point home to use force," he said.

"ARF! ARF! ARF!""Bushies balls are this BIG!"

Unfortunately for the world, you get "more war" cheerleading from undisclosed Israeli sourcing:

Reacting to Bolton, a “senior Israeli security official” told Agence France-Presse that “one should listen very closely to what Bolton has to say.”

During his trip to Israel this week for the the Herzliya Conference, Bolton has ratcheted up his criticisms of the report, saying on Sunday that the “illegitimate politicization” of the NIE was “a quasi-coup by the intelligence services.”

The News deeply objects to the appointment of Mr. Rove to speak this June. At Commencement two years ago on June 4, 2006, Headmaster Shanahan asked graduating seniors to think of their responsibilities to themselves, and to others. He lamented how “responsibility to others and for oneself has been all but forgotten in certain circles.” Mr. Shanahan alluded to various public figures who have been exposed for scandalous activities, noting that in spite of their lack of ethics and sense of responsibility they were all found to be “not guilty.” At that Commencement Mr. Shanahan posed a very important and pressing question: “How can so many moral, ethical and legal laws be broken and still no one is guilty, no one assumes public responsibility for having chosen to do wrong?”

It is ironic that the man who issued those words two years ago has chosen a commencement speaker who has gained infamy in many circles for less-than-ethical decisions and actions.Thus far, Mr. Rove has not been indicted for any major crimes. But, many would argue that he is as culpable for the compromised situation the country finds itself in as any other figure of the Bush administration.

snip

Helping to send the U.S. to war in Iraq is not the only thing Mr. Rove is infamous for. For example, he has acknowledged being a source for an article that disclosed the identity of former C.I.A. officer Valerie Plame (although he did not use her name in conversation). However, the point of this article is not to recount a long list of unethical decisions. Mr. Rove would be a very interesting speaker, and having him give a Special Program address could make sense. However, he is unfit to deliver our graduation address. The point of the graduation ceremonies is to celebrate the seniors and the unforgettable time they have spent at Choate and to bring the community together around the climactic moment on the school calendar. Instead, we will be deeply divided. A graduation speaker should inspire us. More importantly, he should represent the values of the school and serve as a role model for the graduates as they enter the adult world. Rove does neither of those two things.

What kind of message does hosting Mr. Rove send to the student body? Do we wish to condone his behavior? It would seem that students are being told that the ends justify the means. The News urges Mr. Shanahan to reconsider his decision. While it is gracious of Mr. Rove to offer his services as Commencement speaker, The News asks that the school kindly reject the offer.

Karl Rove is widely believed to have been instrumental in the current administration’s decision to go to war with Iraq. He chaired the White House Iraq Group, which, according to CNN and Newsweek, was created with the objective of publicizing the threat posed to the U.S. by Saddam Hussein prior to the Iraq War.

Additionally, Mr. Rove has been accused of leaking the identity of undercover CIA agent, Valerie Plume, in retaliation for her husband’s op-ed piece in The New York Times that criticized the evidence that the Bush Administration cited as justification for the War in Iraq. Rove has also been accused of corruption and conflicts of interest in cases where he helped shape administration policies on energy while holding stock in energy companies such as Enron.

Although Rove was never formally indicted on any charge, there is widespread anger towards the school administration’s decision to invite Karl Rove to speak on campus. “Beyond the fact that his being a widely believed Federal criminal stands against most of the principles that we claim have on campus, it is more than disappointing that the decision was made with so little consultation of other members of the Choate community and that Mr. Shanahan chose to invite such a divisive figure to say the least,” observed an angry Alessio Manti ‘08, a member of the graduating class.

Obviously, they have been paying attention to politics in their school. Though, they might want to note that outing Valery Plame, likely, had less to do with retribution against her husband, Ambassador Wilson, for his actions on the Niger documents than it does with stolen state secrets, nuclear secrets, being sold on the black market and the outfit that would have been investigating this issue, Brewster Jennings and Associates:

Edmonds had told this newspaper that members of the Turkish political and diplomatic community in the US had been actively acquiring nuclear secrets. They often acted as a conduit, she said, for Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), Pakistan’s spy agency, because they attracted less suspicion.

She claimed corrupt government officials helped the network, and venues such as the American-Turkish Council (ATC) in Washington were used as drop-off points.

The anonymous letter names a high-level government official who was allegedly secretly recorded speaking to an official at the Turkish embassy between August and December 2001.

It claims the government official warned a Turkish member of the network that they should not deal with a company called Brewster Jennings because it was a CIA front company investigating the nuclear black market. The official’s warning came two years before Brewster Jennings was publicly outed when one of its staff, Valerie Plame, was revealed to be a CIA agent in a case that became a cause célèbre in the US.

Last December, Republicans in Congress introduced a resolution noting the significance of Christmas and the Christian faith, which eventually passed, blurring the lines between church and state — and they’re at it again, attempting to rewrite American history and further the lie that America is a Christian nation. Via Secular Coalition for America:

Jan. 11 - Flush with last year’s success in passing H.Res. 847, “Recognizing the importance of Christmas and the Christian Faith,” Christian nationalists — those who would have the United States be governed as a Christian theocracy — are pushing H.Res. 888, another resolution which promotes a false and distorted Christian nation reinterpretation of our history. Generally, we do not take action regarding resolutions because they are ceremonial in nature and express the non-binding opinion of one chamber. They do not have the force of law. Read on…

For the second time in two weeks, the entire U.S. press has let itself be scooped by Rupert Murdoch's London Sunday Times on a dynamite story of criminal activities by corrupt U.S. officials promoting nuclear proliferation. But there is a worse journalistic sin than being scooped, and that is participating in a cover-up of information that demands urgent attention from the public, the U.S. Congress and the courts.

For the last two weeks --- one could say, for years --- the major American media have been guilty of ignoring entirely the allegations of the courageous and highly credible source Sibel Edmonds, quoted in the London Times on January 6, 2008 in a front-page story that was front-page news in much of the rest of the world but was not reported in a single American newspaper or network. It is up to readers to demand that this culpable silent treatment end.

Just as important, there must be pressure by the public on Congressional committee chairpersons, in particular Representative Henry Waxman and Senator Patrick Leahy. Both have been sitting for years on classified, sworn testimony by Edmonds --- as she revealed in the Times' new story on Sunday --- along with documentation, in their possession, confirming parts of her account. Pressure must be brought for them to hold public hearings to investigate her accusations of widespread criminal activities, over several administrations, that endanger national security. They should call for open testimony under oath by Edmonds --- as she has urged for five years --- and by other FBI officials she has named to them, as cited anonymously in the first Times' story.

And this is the time for those who have so far creditably leaked to the Times of London to come forward, accepting personal risks, to offer their testimony --- and new documents --- both to the Congress and to the American press. I would say to them: Don't do what I did and waste months of precious time trying to get Congressional committees to act as they should in the absence of journalistic pressure. Do your best to inform the American public directly, first, through the major American media.

Finally, with some trepidation, I'm also making this an Open Enrollment thread. Do you want to be on the Pharyngula blogroll? It's easy. First, you need a blog with an RSS feed (I do all my blog browsing with a newsreader, so that's an absolute requirement). Second, you need to give me a link to your blog in a comment here. And finally, you have to pass a test demonstrating that you actually read Pharyngula: name your favorite commenter. (That's a cunning way to get more votes in the Molly nominations.)

Reading and voting? I have been known to do that! Others are taking the Skippy and Jon Swift inspired road, like Barefoot Bum:

My blogroll is always open, but in the spirit of the times, I'm actively soliciting reciprocal links. Link to me and (assuming you don't offend my delicate sensibilities) I'll add your blog to my blogroll. Post a comment to this thread telling me about it. I'll also actually link to you in the body of a post, so you'll get that heady Technorati boost.

I cannot be too offensive since I do bath regularly. Other Bloggers, like myself or Blue Gal, may be trying to find a way to take what might be considered a bit of a negative for some Bloggers and turning it into something that is a positive for everyone:

February 3 is the anniversary of the notorious Blogroll Amnesty Day. It is evolving, quite rightly it seems to me, from a vitriolic attack on A-listers into something more celebratory of us B-C-D-and-DD-list blogs.

We'll be celebrating the small blogosphere that day somehow and suggestions as to how to do so are most welcome.

"Speaking of Jon Swift, the start of 2008 seems like a good time to have another Blogroll Amnesty Day. If you're not on my blogroll, and I'm on yours, leave me a link below and I'll add you (note: racists, creationists, and flat-out weirdos won't be accepted). Instructions below the fold.

Please put your blog name on one line, and the url on the second line, like so:

Same goes for this Blog. If I am on your Blogroll and you notice that you are not on mine, tell me! I will fix it. Heck... Add me to yours and I will add you to mine. Just drop a note in comments here.

For me, it doesn't matter whether you are covering local Connecticut stuff, national politics, and or pretty much anything else. And if you click around you should be able to get a link from Mike, John Swift and skippy as well as from here! Four Blogroll links just for being astute enough to add 4 links from your Blogroll... Does it get any better or easier than that?

ergo, we here at skippy are planning to retaliate by offering real blog amnesty. and here's how it goes:

many smaller blogs link to skippy for one or more of a few reasons: out of politeness, out of a hope that we might notice them and link back, or simply out of the imitation of what it takes to make a good blog. it's the second reason that interests us (we really should have put it as the last reason to be more clear with sentence structure (on the other hand, using less parenthetical phrases in a paragraph would go a long way towards grammatical clarity (too late now))).

to wit: any blog that has linked to skippy and has not received a reciprocal blogroll link will now be included on our roll! all you have to do is notify us in our comments section or email us, and we will happily include you! that will show those big shot elitists too good for the little guy blogs! ha!"

At a time when the bigger Blogs need to be doing more to help build the left community some are, and some aren't. I find it ironic that I posted just last week on Chris Bowers argument that we need to link more effectively:

If everyone on the left works a little harder on this we can turn the tides on on the Google Wars and win. We have already made a lot of inroads since this 2004 picture:

The graphs represent the aggregate linkage going on leading up to the 2004 election. Reds (them) are the Republican bloggers, and Blues (us) are the Democratic bloggers. The full expanation of the graphs particulars are on page 9 of the PDF paper. Basically, the first graph connects dots (blogs) when there is strong linkage between them (+25 during the period), the second one where there is less stronger linkage (+5), and they've a 3rd map that includes all linkage that I've not included.

Between blogs then (not taking into consideration that diaries on #8DailyKos and #17MyDD serve to allow massive coordiantion and spreading of message), there's just a lot more coordination through linking among Republican than there has been with Democratic bloggers, at least on the surface of particular URL's. The other interesting thing I noted was that the blog by George Bush's campaign didn't even make the top 40-- now that's pitiful.

We were less coordinated in '04. But in '06 we did little things a little better. I am sure the more recent graphs would look a lot better. But you know that we can still keep on improving on this.

Remember that every time you link to any site you are, over time, creating a kind of GOOGLEBOMB effect on that site when it comes to site rankings, search results, etc.. Tagging and choice of words that are used to link are important in these cumulitive effects as well.

Shorter Chris Bowers

"We innovate more than you, we hired people to help us, and because we did that there is no place for you lone bloggers anymore -- because WE decide who makes it and who doesn't."

Oh, you really have to read this self-congratulatory drivel to believe it. It's truly amazing to see one blogger fellating the entire Big Name Blogosphere in one post, while at the same time consigning the rest of us to the ranks of the MySpacers.

Kool Kidz Klub indeed.

It's funny how Bowers uses a quote by Jeffrey Feldman to illustrate his point, because as I've mentioned before, I had a very nice conversation about blogging just last week with Mr. Feldman, who seems to be in no way a blog snob. In fact, I was pleasantly surprised to see that there is at least one Big Name Blogger who isn't puffed up with his own self-importance.

But with Kos and Atrios making a big show about "culling the blogroll", and Chris Bowers playing "Mine's Bigger" with the rest of the blogosphere, is this really what it's come to? Is this the Revenge of the Nerds come to fruition? Is this the guys who DIDN'T get laid on prom night finally staking their claim to coolness?

If so, are we going to sit by and take it? Are we going to just toil away while guys like Atrios and Kos and Chris Bowers define the rules and brand the rest of us as useless?

I adopted this policy in a spirit of both self-interest and altruism. In the blogosphere links are like capital. By offering links to others, others would be more inclined to offer links to me. But I am also very grateful to those who helped me out by throwing a link my way or adding me to their blogroll when I was just starting out. Now that I am a Large Mammal, according the Truth Laid Bear Ecosystem, I have tried to return the favor by helping out those further down the food chain.

Links are capital! It is the foundation of bringing views from fellow bloggers out of obscurity and into the top of search engine results. And just how much does it cost any blogger to spend some of this valuable capital?

ZIP. Zilch. Zero dollars.

Not even one penny to use the most effective marketing tool that Blogtopia has to offer.

All you have to do is put a few seconds into the act of cut'n'paste into your Blogroll or into a post... And you make a huge difference for everyone in our fight.

We should all work together to fight the good progressive fight and not be so critical in terms of other people's sites. I read CTBlue, Ed's Daily Rant, CT Local Politics, and the watch sites everyday and I learn something new from all of those guys which I incorporate into my site and that's the way it should be. Learn something from me and I learn something from you.

2006 is going to be a HUGE election year and Connecticut will be ground zero in terms of who controls Congress (2nd, 4th 5th district races). The faster we can all work to get this site up to full-speed, the more national attention it will receive.

He also called me out for not having links to his sites... Which I quickly fixed. lol

2006 is behind us but there are still a lot of common causes that we all share, and we can all help each other in achieving our goals. Linking is the first, easiest AND cheapest way to start.

For more background on all of this: Boston Joe has a Meta diary up x-posted at BooTrib and at MLW covering a bit more of this Meta discussion in a thoughtful way. Both have generated a lot of comments. I usually hate Meta... But this topic is the foundation of what Blogging is all about.

We can do better than we have been doing. And if we keep building on what we already have our numbers (and the fact that we deal in reality) will easily overcome the right wing echo chamber's lies and propaganda.

McCain's rise is a dramatic turn in a state where former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani was the favorite last fall before fading in the early decision states of Iowa, New Hampshire and Michigan.

After being widely written off last year, McCain now is preferred by 39 percent of Republicans, compared with 16 percent for Giuliani and 11 percent for former Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts, according to the poll by the Center for Survey Research and Analysis at the University of Connecticut.

In the Democratic race, Clinton is favored by 41 percent of Democrats, compared with 27 percent for Barack Obama and 9 percent for John Edwards. One in five Democrats is undecided, an audience Obama is trying to reach with television ads that began Saturday.

Total American dead in the Iraq Illegal Occupation: 2500251325322540254625582571258525972605261926412710273727582788280928262865288829062959300630183025306730873118313231513166 318932103233324532663299331633373358338734093444350435193546357735923611363136833705372537383760378037953823383038383845386638753881388638913896390839213926

Total coalition forces dead: 307Total Iraqi Dead: 700,000+

You don't hear too much in the media about how we are approaching 4000 dead American kids in this illegal invasion and occupation. And you rarely ever hear anything about the deaths of Iraqis.

Blogrolling Policy -This is a liberal blog and I have a liberal Blogrolling policy. I will add anyone to my Blogroll who adds me to theirs, whether conservative, liberal, moderate, libertarian, or even non-political, with the exception of spam blogs... If you Blogroll me and notice that I have not returned the favor, nudge me in the comments here until I notice!

Larry Craig and David Vitter — “two United States Senators implicated in extramarital sexual activity” — have named themselves as co-sponsors of S.J. Res. 43, the Marriage Protection Amendment. If passed, the bill would amend the Constitution to declare that marriage “shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman.”